Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to World1945. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
West Germany sues Norway (II)
Topic Started: May 16 2008, 02:48 PM (1,065 Views)
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
West Germany tries again the Kingdom of Norway to recognize all German claims on New Swabia.

The judges:

State Judge
El Salvador José Gustavo Guerrero (President)
France Jules Basdevant
Chile Alejandro Álvarez
Mexico Isidro Fabela
USA Green Hackworth
Poland Bohdan Winiarski
Yugoslavia Milovan Zoricic
Belgium Charles de Visscher
UK Arnold McNair, 1st Baron McNair
Norway Helge Klaestad
Egypt Abdul Badawi
USSR Sergei Krylov
Canada John Read
China Hsu Mo

Adenauer
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
France
Member Avatar
Liberté, égalité, fraternité
[ *  *  * ]
Am I to understand correctly that the Federal German Republic is claiming sovereign right to territory claimed by the third Reich, whose claim to said land was highly dubious?

Judge Jules Basdevant

ooc: Jules Basdevant is now the President./ooc
Tremblez, tyrans et vous perfides
L'opprobre de tous les partis
Tremblez ! vos projets parricides
Vont enfin recevoir leurs prix !
Tout est soldat pour vous combattre
S'ils tombent, nos jeunes héros,
La terre en produit de nouveaux,
Contre vous tout prêts à se battre !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
We will soon give the legal position, in which the claim is a rightful German claim.

Gustav Radbruch
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Egypt
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Egypt declines to recognise any nation's claim to the Antarctic continent.
Representatives of the Kingdom of Egypt
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=200]Our Embassy[/URL] [URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=256&st=0]Invest in Egypt[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
United States
Member Avatar
Land of the Free and Home of the Brave
[ *  *  * ]
So we can take that to mean the Judge from Egypt abstains from the proceeding?
Signatures are broken...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Great Britain
Member Avatar
Land of Hope and Glory
[ *  *  * ]
Britain would not recognise any German claim on any territories in the Antarctic.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
OOC: The judges at the International Court are not doing politics but judging. As such you have to judge with the laws. Not bound to politics. You have to differentiate that. So the political (gaming) position has to sleep until the end of the trial. OTOH you have to judge with the laws.\OOC

The West German government is sending the judge at the Bundesverfassungsgericht, Martin Drath, to the trial.

New Swabia is an area of about 600.000 km². On January 19th 1939 Germany claimed this area by entering resp. dropping of German flags. We ask the High Court to recognize the German claims and to deny Norway any claims in this area.

A claim is international law any uninhabited land is claimed by entering the soil and putting up of flags. That was done by Germans in 1939. Norway did never do such a step.

The International Law has these prerequisites for a valid claim (OOC: Sorry, I have only a German source: Georg Dahm, Jost Delbrück, Rüdiger Wolfrum: Völkerrecht; § 54 pp. 347.):

1. The land has to be uninhabited (terra nullius). That's true.
2. The land has to be claimed with the will of rulership (animus occupandi). That was done so.
3. There must be any manifestation of this will, in other words there must be an at least temporary occupation of the land. This must have been for and on behalf of a state and not individuals. That was done by Germany in December 1938 to February 1939.

Norway's "claim" on this lacks any manifestation of the animus occupandi.

(OOC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_nullius ; http://books.google.de/books?id=wY4T25cRwC...hl=de#PPT320,M1

John O'Brien, International Law page 208.)

Thus only the West German claims are valid.

Radbruch
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norway
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
The Norwegian viewpoint is of course that the Norwegian claim to Dronning Maud Land has precedence over the German claim since it's made before the latter and there's a much longer history of Norwegian activities in the area.

Whether the Norwegian claim is valid or not remains to be judged or agreed upon through a future Antarctic Treaty, but let us argue our case against the claims made by the West German representative.

First of all: Australia, France, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom have made mutual recognitions of each others' claims to Antarctic territories, with the British being the first to recognize the Norwegian claims.

Secondly: the Norwegian claims are not only based on discovery by Norwegians in most of the area before any Germans, but also on early occupation and use of the areas by Norwegian whaling captains. Economic activities in the area is an accepted ground for claims and as such the ground for several other nations' claims as well.

Thirdly: due to the unconditional surrender to the Allied Powers, among them Norway, signed by representatives of the German government on May 8 1945 this date is usually given for Germany's abandonment of the claim to Dronning Maud Land. Germany has also renounced territorial claims on Norway in the Versailles treaty section V.

Fourthly: Norway does not lack any manifestation of animus occupandi since the Norwegian Polar Institute (Norsk Polarinstitutt) was formed in 1948 with the express purpose of the best possible administration of Norwegian polar areas. It is a part of the Norwegian Ministry of the Environment and is assigned the administration of Dronning Maud Land.

Fifthly: the flags mentioned by the West German representative are according to our sources 1.5-metre(5 ft)-tall iron poles topped with a swastika. Whether these are accurate symbols of the German nation and as such a ground for claims we leave to others to decide for themselves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
We do object all Norwegian reasonings:

1. A treaty in which these nations confirm their claims is nothing worth in regards to others. Otherwise it would have been a treaty against thirds and would be thus invalid. The only confirming is the mutual recognition. But that touches in no way the claims of others. Also only these states have recognized the claims. No other nation did.

2. A lawful occupation is done, if these whaling captains and discoverers had acted in the name of the government. They must have officially claimed the island in the will and wishes of the Norwegian government. That didn't happen. There was no such expedition before acting with animus occupandi in the behalf of the Norwegian government. Indeed the Norwegian government did not claim the land before January 17th 1939, just two days before the Germans did. And they had nobody there to claim the land in situ. Thus a legitime occupation of terra nullius did not take place. All Norwegian actions before 19th January 1939 are not legally claiming the land. Ergo: The Norwegian claim is not existant as of January 19th 1939. Later claims of Norway are void because of the legitime German claim. Terra nullius does not exist there.

3. No German claim on Norwegian territory was given up during the time of occupation. (OOC: Wikipedia has here a severe mistake, as indeed the Reich was never dissolved). Also we do not have given up claims on claims of these nations. The claims of Norway are not more than that. The Norwegian "Dronning Maud Land", which is also much bigger than the German New Swabia, is no integral part of Norway, no territory or colony. Just a claim, which is not rcognized by any other country. And as such we do not have given up anything as New Swabia is not mentioned in the treaty.

4. See 2.

5. According to Art. 1 II of the Versailles treaty West Germany is the only legitime heir of the German Reich. In 1939 unfortunately the Swastika was recognized as German emblem. We are more than willing to exchange the flags. However, we all agree about the character of this flag. But that character is here irrelevant. It was then recognized, even by Norway, as German national sign. Only as such we are talking about and refuse to tolerate to be equalled as Nazis!

Radbruch
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norway
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
We are pointing out previous recognition because it shows that such recognition exists, that the Norwegian claim has historically been seen as valid by other nations as opposed to the German claims.

We also point out that the grounds for the Norwegian claims are by no means weaker than several other recognized claims in Antarctica and that an invalidation of the Norwegian claims will in effect be an invalidation of those nations' claims as well.

We use the term Dronning Maud Land to include this area since this geographical term is internationally recognized unlike Neuschwabenland/New Swabia.

Last: it was not our intention to in any way equal the West German government to the Nazi regime, but it was our intention to remind the assembly that the West German government is maintaining a claim originally made by the Nazi regime and that the legality of Nazi territorial claims has been repudiated since. Also West Germany has dismissed the Nazi regime's right to represent Germany:
West Germany
 
Also the Nazis themselves had put the Constitution out of action to build their own thing. Therefore they hijacked the Reich to build their own "Reich" instead of the existing nation. Another reason, why the German Reich is not equal with the Nazis.

The Kingdom of Norway has nothing more to add in this matter and awaits the verdict of this assembly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Belgium
Member Avatar
"Strength through Unity"
[ *  *  * ]
The Belgium will not recognise any German claim on any territories in the Antarctic.
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=694&view=getnewpost]Embassy [/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Denmark
Member Avatar
Der er et yndigt land
[ *  *  * ]
Denmark would not recognize any German claims in the Antarctic, and we are frankly disgusted by this move.
55 Danes kidnapped by Chinese communists and held hostage.
You are not forgotten.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
As only these nations, and of them even not all, were in war with Germany this had political reasons. And these reasons here of court have nothing to do with law.
Also we are not invalidating any other claims in the Antarctic. In contrast. If the other nations acted in this way we have shown, occupying with animus occupandi and the manifestation in a valid way, there claims are strengenthed much more. Also we have a precedence case: Clipperton island case. In that the French island Clipperton Island in the Pacific was claimed by Mexico as well. It was found they had no valid claims as there was no valid occupation before the French one.
Also: The geographical names of New Swabia and Wegener Plateau are recognized for these areas. The other parts not claimed by Germany, which is much more, remains Dronning Maud Land.
Finally, we do not abstain, from what we said. But that is here out of context. Yes, the Nazis acted in the name of the Reich and hijacked it. And yes, they don't have to be equalled with the Reich and German nation. However, we can not steal us away from the responsability here. Otherwise we would not have the obligation to excuse for the war and pay reparations. But if we have the responsability. We pay reparations and we excused us. So it is only fair, if we also have the claims, which were not given up by Versailles II.
The German government, still believing in the validity of this claim, would generally accept a settlement of this cause, as we tried it before. But this shall in no way mean we're demanding something, which is not ours!

Radbruch
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
OOC: All players with judges at this court have to act here not politically but as judges! Therefore they have to make a substanciated judgement, why they judge this way or the other. You have to say, why the one or the other opinion is valid, and the other is not.
And you have to do so on the base of the laws! Thus any political action here is invalid.
So the questions are:

1. Was there a legitime occupation by Norwegians done in the name of Norway and within the governmental will of Norway before January 19th 1939? A potential Norwegian whaler going to the land and claiming it is not sufficient! Any Norwegian had to act in the name and will of the Norwegian government in situ. Which has to be proven by Norway!

2. If there was no Norwegian claim before January 19th 1939: Could have Germany given up the claim by the treaty of Versailles? So is a claim on something not generally recognized by the other nations an integral part of Norway as Norwegian land, territory or colony?

You have to answer these questions in a juristical way and not political! You have to give up here your roleplay as nation and accept here the role as judge!
However you can also try to find a settlement. Like Germany pays 2 billion $ for any Norwegian claims on it. Then you have no problems of finding a judgement.

Adler
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Norway
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
The Norwegian judge Helge Klæstad feels he must excuse himself from this case in order to not cause any suspicion of bias on the verdict.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The United Nations · Next Topic »
Add Reply